Prepared for the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists ... · the applied, commercial archaeological workforce had expanded by 9.9% in 2015-16. • In 2016-17, the number of archaeological

Archaeological Market Survey 2016-17

Prepared for the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists and the Federation of Archaeological Managers and Employers

Prepared by

Landward Research Ltd

email [email protected]

Registered in England and Wales, number 03749035

Archaeological Market Survey 2017

This report has been prepared by Landward Research Ltd in its professional capacity as

research, training and project management specialists, with reasonable skill, care and

diligence within the agreed scope and terms of contract and taking account of the

manpower and resources devoted to it by agreement with its clients, and is provided by

Landward Research Ltd solely for its clients, the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists and

the Federation of Archaeological Managers and Employers. It may be further distributed as

the clients see fit if Landward Research Ltd is fully credited as the originator of this report

and Kenneth Aitchison is fully credited as the author.

Author

Kenneth Aitchison

Publication Date

October 2017

This publication is © Landward Research Ltd and is released under a CC BY-SA 4.0 licence.

Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

Archaeological Market Survey 2017 – March 2017 Page 3

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This project was commissioned by the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists and the

Federation of Archaeological Managers and Employers and funded by the Chartered Institute

for Archaeologists, the Federation of Archaeological Managers and Employers and Historic

England.

Kate Geary, Nick Shepherd and Tim Malim acted as the Project Board.

So Young Ann undertook the data analysis.

Thanks to all the respondents who provided the data. Your time and knowledge have been

the building blocks of this study.


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This Archaeological Market Survey report is on the State of the Market for Archaeological

Services in the United Kingdom in 2016-17. It has been prepared by Landward Research Ltd

on behalf of the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA), FAME (Federation of

Archaeological Managers and Employers) and Historic England.

The survey has gathered data via a questionnaire sent to FAME members and CIfA

Registered Organisations, therefore the focus is primarily on the commercial archaeology

sector. In addition, some limited subsidiary data have been examined for the numbers of

archaeologists employed by planning authorities, as this is also pertinent to understanding

the state of the archaeological market.

The overall aims of this survey are to provide:

• a unique analysis of the archaeological sector as part of the overall UK economy;

• statistics that allow estimation of total value of the sector to the economy;

• data on indicative numbers of employed professional archaeologists;

• data for analysis of long-term sustainability for the sector;

• an indication of social benefit through outreach;

• data that can enable informed lobbying to help protect the UK’s heritage; and

• to support planning effectively for the future so that the profession is sustainable and

results in a benefit for society

In financial year 2016-17 commercial archaeology grew in terms of the number of employees

working in the sector, but levels of financial turnover decreased and profit levels were

unchanged.

The sector was not as confident as it had been a year earlier.

The majority of businesses in the sector did not expect to expand significantly in the next

year (2017-18) (e.g. in premises, vehicles, capital equipment), but they had increased their

staff complements (and continued to plan to do further in the next year). While staffing

levels were increasing, average levels of turnover (and so turnover per staff member) were

falling slightly.

This meant that productivity levels were low and falling. Lack of capital investment at a time

of staffing increase has been recognised as a component of weak productivity growth across

the construction sector1, to which applied archaeological practice clearly belongs. This is

interpreted as representing cautiousness when times are still uncertain, as adding to payroll

is a more flexible expense than investing in capital-heavy equipment or premises, the costs

of which are more difficult to reduce in downturns.

No figures are available for the sector’s investment in research and development.

The sector continues to have limited confidence in planning policy frameworks, and does not

consider that local planning authorities are being provided with sufficient professional

advice.

1 The Economist vol 424, number 9054 August 19th-25th 2017 “Construction: how to build better”, p. 10; “The

construction industry: least improved”, pp 55-56.


Employment

• An estimated 4,351 people were working in UK applied, commercial archaeology in

2016-17. This was more than immediately before the economic downturn of 2007-08.

• It is estimated that the applied, commercial archaeological workforce grew by 13.2%

in financial year 2016-17.

• In comparison with the previous year, the rate of workforce expansion had increased;

the applied, commercial archaeological workforce had expanded by 9.9% in 2015-16.

• In 2016-17, the number of archaeological staff providing expert advice to local

planning authorities decreased by 3.3% (a loss of 8.9 FTE posts).

• Together, these changes combine to result in the net number of people working in

professional archaeology in the UK growing by 8.7% in financial year 2016-17 to an

estimated total of 6,253 individuals. This figure combines the numbers working in

applied, commercial archaeology, curatorial archaeology (archaeologists advising

local planning authorities) and all other areas of archaeological employment..

• The ongoing increase in jobs with permanent contracts that started in 2014-15 has

not been simply a response to an increase in short-term fieldwork, as that would

likely be represented by a disproportionate increase in the percentage of fixed-term

posts.

Financial Performance

• The average (mean) reported UK turnover for an applied archaeology company in

2016-17 was £2.3m, a decrease of 20% over the year since March 2016. 2015-16 may

have been an abnormal year – overall revenue and profitability increased dramatically

in that year, and then fell back in 2016-17 (although the medium-term trend is

towards growth in revenue and profits).

• In 2016-17, 1% of the turnover of UK applied archaeology companies was generated

from non-UK work.

• It is estimated that the total revenue of UK commercial archaeology in 2016-17 was

approximately £228m.

• Profit (or ‘surplus’) levels remained low – an average of 5.2%, the same level as

reported in 2015-16.

• Salaries typically rose in line with inflation in 2016-17 (CPI at the census date was

2.3%).

• Charge-out rates rose by 3.1% on average. As more staff had been recruited, this may

either indicate a rise in value or that lower paid staff are forming a larger part of the

workforce.

• Average turnover per member of staff in 2016-17 was £45,309, a slight decrease from

2015-16 of 0.7%

• Many of the largest employers are constituted as not-for-profit organisations.

• Overall, the financial performance statistics suggest that the sector may be

approaching maximum capacity – it did not grow in terms of turnover in 2016-17,

despite staff complements increasing (meaning productivity was falling), and profit

levels had stabilised.


Market Sectors

• The overwhelming majority of income came from private sector clients (81%, a slight

increase from 79% in 2015-16).

• The most important market sector continued to be residential development, which

provided 42% of income (a decline from 53% in 2015-16), followed by commercial

and industrial development. The catchall “any other services not categorised above”

category provided 8.8% of sectoral income, and increase from 0.3% in 2015-16.

Business Confidence

• While the sector in 2017 was still relatively confident, levels of confidence in future market conditions had declined since 2016.

• The majority of respondents in 2017 expected to maintain or increase staffing levels

in 2017-18, although the sector overall was not as confident of doing this as it had

been in 2016.

• While there was overall confidence that market conditions would not deteriorate in

2017-18, the sector was not as confident about the future as it had been one year

before (which in turn was not as confident as the sector had been in 2015).

• Most respondents expected there would be no business failures in the sector in the

next year.

• Respondents generally did not expect to expand their businesses in 2017-18. This was

the first time since 2013 that expansion was not anticipated by the majority of

respondents. This is surprising given anticipated expansion of workloads and

concerns that were raised over recruitment.

Skills, Training and Qualifications

• For the first time since this survey series began in 2008, fieldwork skills were not the

area where skills loss was most frequently identified; desk-based or environmental

assessment was the area where most respondents identified that they had lost skills.

• As in 2016 and 2015, more respondents reported buying-in skills than reported

losing them, with fieldwork skill and artefact / ecofact conservation being the areas

where skills were most often bought in from subcontractors.

• It has now become the norm for the areas where training was focussed to match

reasonably closely to the areas where skills were being reported as being lost - so

these skills gaps (skills that existing staff needed but lacked) were being tackled by

investment in training. This has been the case since 2014.

• Employers continue to be supportive of the NVQ in Archaeological Practice, and

many would be interested in supporting an Apprentice in Historic Environment

Practice.

Forms of Contract

• Respondents typically use an exchange of letters/emails without detailed contracts.

However a range of Forms of Contract were identified as being used; ICE standard

Forms are not used as often as either contractors’ or clients’ own standard terms and

conditions.


Perceptions

• Respondents were unsure whether the economic climate for development would

improve in the next year (2017-18), and were less confident of improvement than

they had been a year previously.

• Respondents were unsure whether their heritage teams would grow, but were more

confident that their teams would not get smaller.

• Late payment of bills and non-payment were both considered to be slightly more

problematic than they had been in 2015-16.

• Respondents continued to be unsure about the assertions that either “current

national planning policy frameworks are making it easier to justify heritage work and

revenue levels” or that “current national planning policy frameworks weaken the case

for heritage work and revenue levels”. Sentiment in both cases had become slightly

more positive than in 2016.

• They continued to agree that a shortage of heritage staff in local planning authorities

was a major constraint on heritage projects (which could affect income generation).

Response Rate

• Response levels were good. There was a slight decline in the percentage of

organisations providing data (55.7% declining from 56.4% in 2016).

Future Work

• This study will be repeated to gather data for 2017-18 when it is intended that this

will form part of the quinquennial Profiling the Profession project which gathers

comparable data from the entire archaeological profession in the UK.


Contents

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MARKET SURVEY 2016-17 ............................................................................................ 1

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................................................................... 3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................... 4

1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................... 10

1.1 Responses .............................................................................................................................................. 11

1.2 FAME Membership ............................................................................................................................. 12

1.3 CIfA Registered Organisations ....................................................................................................... 12

1.4 Constitution ........................................................................................................................................... 12

1.5 Location of Head and Subsidiary Offices ................................................................................... 14

1.6 Years Trading ........................................................................................................................................ 17

2 STAFF NUMBERS ................................................................................................................................. 18

2.1 Employment .......................................................................................................................................... 19

2.1.1 Total Staff .......................................................................................................................................... 19

2.1.2 Staff Nationalities ........................................................................................................................... 20

2.1.3 Total Fee Earners ............................................................................................................................ 20

2.1.4 Overseas Staff .................................................................................................................................. 20

2.1.5 Total Employment in UK Archaeology ................................................................................... 21

2.2 Contracts ................................................................................................................................................. 23

2.3 Staff Turnover ....................................................................................................................................... 24

2.4 Staff Lost From the Sector ............................................................................................................... 25

2.5 Salaries..................................................................................................................................................... 26

2.6 Charge-out Rates ................................................................................................................................ 27

3 FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE ............................................................................................................ 28

3.1 Turnover .................................................................................................................................................. 28

3.2 Profit Levels ........................................................................................................................................... 31

3.3 Funding Sources (areas of activity as turnover) ....................................................................... 32

3.4 Market Sectors...................................................................................................................................... 33

4 FORMS OF CONTRACT ...................................................................................................................... 36

5 BUSINESS CONFIDENCE ................................................................................................................... 37

5.1 Staffing Levels ....................................................................................................................................... 38

5.2 Market Conditions .............................................................................................................................. 39

5.3 Businesses Ceasing Trading ............................................................................................................ 40


5.4 Expansion ............................................................................................................................................... 42

6 SKILLS, TRAINING AND QUALIFICATIONS ................................................................................. 44

6.1 Areas of Skills Losses .......................................................................................................................... 44

6.2 Areas of Skills Buy-in .......................................................................................................................... 45

6.3 Areas of Training ................................................................................................................................. 46

6.4 Skills Issues Across the Sector ........................................................................................................ 47

6.5 NVQ .......................................................................................................................................................... 48

6.6 Apprenticeship ..................................................................................................................................... 48

7 PERCEPTIONS........................................................................................................................................ 49

8 FURTHER COMMENTS ....................................................................................................................... 51

APPENDIX – QUESTIONNAIRE ......................................................................................................................... 52


1 INTRODUCTION

Economic changes that began in the autumn of 2008 have impacted significantly upon

archaeological practice in the UK.

The Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA) and the Federation of Archaeological

Managers and Employers (FAME) have collected data on employment and skills issues in

applied archaeological practice since October 2008. A series of nine quarterly surveys were

initially conducted, gathering and presenting data from October 2008 to April 2011, and

subsequently, CIfA and FAME commissioned Landward Research Ltd to gather data on a six-

monthly basis and to present reports on the state of the archaeological market. The

December 2012 report2 was combined with the sector wide Archaeology Labour Market

Intelligence: Profiling the Profession 2012-133 report.

The effects of the economic situation began to directly impact upon commercial, applied

archaeology from 2008 onwards. In 2010 and 2011, the changing economic effects began to

be felt in the fields of archaeological services to local authorities, in national heritage

agencies and in universities. The full effects of these changes on employment patterns within

archaeology were not made clear until results of the pan-sectoral Archaeology Labour

Market Intelligence: Profiling the Profession 2012-13 project revealed the profundity of

change with a considerable depth of job losses across the whole sector.

The reports on those earliest surveys are available on the CIfA website via the Recession –

managing and planning page and on the FAME website http://www.famearchaeology.co.uk/.

The Chartered Institute for Archaeologists continues to need up-to-date research to be best

able to support their membership by informing the Institute and its members about the

effects of the economic situation on archaeology. The Federation of Archaeological

Managers and Employers also seeks to provide market intelligence to its members to help

them compete effectively. The fact that both organisations have commissioned this survey

demonstrates the value of the information for advocacy of archaeology at Westminster and

national parliaments.

Together with Historic England, CIfA and FAME have commissioned Landward Research Ltd

to continue to analyse and evaluate the state of the market for archaeological services,

examining employment, turnover, market segmentation and other relevant topics.

This exercise is being carried out on an annual basis over five years, collecting data for the

entire UK for every year from 2013-14 up to and including 2017-18, when it is intended that

the Profiling the Profession series of projects will continue their quinquennial cycle. It will

also ensure that the data gathered will be able to contribute directly to an intended future

Profiling the Profession 2017-18 project, thus ensuring that the funders will have a full role in

guiding the design and then delivery of that project. The report presented here is primarily

2 Aitchison, K. 2013. State of the Archaeological Market December 2012. Landward Research Ltd.

http://www.landward.eu/State%20of%20the%20Archaeological%20Market%20-

%20December%202012%20050913.pdf 3 Aitchison, K. & Rocks-Macqueen, D. 2013. Archaeology Labour Market Intelligence: Profiling the Profession

2012-13. Landward Research Ltd.

http://www.landward.eu/Archaeology%20Labour%20Market%20Intelligence%20Profiling%20the%20Prof

ession%202012-13.pdf

http://www.archaeologists.net/profession/recession

http://www.archaeologists.net/profession/recession

http://www.famearchaeology.co.uk/

http://www.landward.eu/State%20of%20the%20Archaeological%20Market%20-%20December%202012%20050913.pdf

http://www.landward.eu/State%20of%20the%20Archaeological%20Market%20-%20December%202012%20050913.pdf

http://www.landward.eu/Archaeology%20Labour%20Market%20Intelligence%20Profiling%20the%20Profession%202012-13.pdf

http://www.landward.eu/Archaeology%20Labour%20Market%20Intelligence%20Profiling%20the%20Profession%202012-13.pdf


based on data gathered from FAME member organisations and CIfA Registered

Organisations, who are considered to represent the majority of employers working in

commercial, client-funded applied archaeology.

The data gathered applied on the 31st March 2017, and so this report is on the situation at

the end of financial year 2016-17. The survey was issued shortly before the UK General

Election on 8th June 2017 with the survey closing after the result of that election was known.

Throughout, comparisons are made with the results of the Archaeological Market Survey

20164 and Archaeological Market Survey 20155 projects, both of which gathered data from

the same survey population as the current report (FAME members and CIfA Registered

Organisations).

Data have also been incorporated from the Historic England / ALGAO / IHBC report on local

authority staff resources6 regarding archaeological staff advising local planning authorities in

England.

Two changes were made to the survey in 2017. The first followed the announcement of the

UK’s planned departure from the European Union in 2019, with a new question introduced

regarding the nationalities of respondents’ staff members. The second asked respondents to

geographically locate percentages of their turnover by UK country.

1.1 Responses

In total, 97 organisations were asked to provide responses; 78 CIfA Registered Organisations

and 55 FAME members. As most of these organisations are both CIfA ROs and members of

FAME, the total number of organisations approached is less than the total number of CIfA

ROs plus FAME members.

The questionnaire sought data that applied on 31st March 2017, the end of financial year

2016-17. Links to the questionnaire were sent to potential respondents on 2nd June 2017,

with automated reminder and follow-up emails encouraging completion being sent

periodically until the survey closed on 9th July 2017.

A total of 59 responses were received, although five were duplicate entries, so the total

number of useable responses was 54, a response rate of 55.7% - a slight decline from the

2016 response rate of 56.4% (the 2015 response rate was 59.6%).

Not every respondent answered every question.

4 Aitchison, K. Archaeological Market Survey 2016. Landward Research Ltd. http://landward.org/landward/wp-

content/uploads/sites/6/2016/11/Archaeological-Market-Survey-2016.pdf 5Aitchison, K. Archaeological Market Survey 2015. Landward Research Ltd.

http://www.landward.eu/Archaeological_Market_Survey_2015.pdf 6 Lloyd-James, O. 2017.The Ninth Report on Local Authority Staff Resources. Historic England / Association of

Local Government Archaeological Officers / Institute of Historic Building Conservation.

https://content.historicengland.org.uk/images-books/publications/ninth-report-la-staff-resources/ninth-

report-la-staff-resources.pdf/

http://landward.org/landward/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2016/11/Archaeological-Market-Survey-2016.pdf

http://landward.org/landward/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2016/11/Archaeological-Market-Survey-2016.pdf

http://www.landward.eu/Archaeological_Market_Survey_2015.pdf

https://content.historicengland.org.uk/images-books/publications/ninth-report-la-staff-resources/ninth-report-la-staff-resources.pdf/



1.2 FAME Membership

is your organisation a member of FAME?

41 of the 53 respondents to this question were FAME members (77% of the respondents,

75% of the FAME membership).

1.3 CIfA Registered Organisations

is your organisation a CIfA Registered Organisation?

36 od the 51 responses to this question were from CIfA Registered Organisations (71% of the

respondents). This represented 46% of CIfA Registered Organisations.

1.4 Constitution

The questionnaire asked about how respondent organisations were legally constituted. As in

previous surveys, the majority of responses came from private limited companies (32 of the

58 respondents to this question). The survey allowed respondents to check as many

categories of constitution as applied; four indicated that they were both limited companies

and registered charities. This means that the total number of responses for 2017 (54

respondents providing 58 responses) is greater than the number of respondents.

How is your organisation legally constituted? please check multiple categories if appropriate

Constitution Archaeological Market Survey 2017 March 2017

Archaeological Market Survey 2016 March 2016


private limited company (ltd) 33 61% 30 53% 33 62%

registered charity 8 15% 12 21% 13 25%

constituent part of a local planning authority

4 7% 5 9% 7 13%

constituent part of a university 5 9% 8 14% 6 11%

other 8 15% 6 11% 5 9%

public limited company (plc) 0 0% 2 4% 2 4%

total respondents 54 57 53

Using the numbers of staff reported as being employed on 31st March 2017 (managerial,

professional, technical and administrative), the organisations that identify as being registered

charities were, on average, the largest organisations in the sector (as was the case in the

Heritage Market Surveys 2016 and 2015).


staff numbers by organisational legal constitution

Constitution

orgs total staff

avg staff

registered charity

4 882 220.5

private limited company (ltd)

33 1315.5 39.9

constituent part of a university

5 195.8 39.2

constituent part of a local planning authority 4 96.8 24.2

other

8 64.5 8.1

public limited company (plc)

0 0 -

(orgs = number of organisations providing both staffing data and information on constitution)

Note that this table includes deliberate double counting – each of the organisations that

identified as falling under two categories has been included under both headings; also note

that not all organisations provided both information on staffing and their legal constitutions.

The data continue to show (as was the case in 2016 and 2015) that while private limited

companies were the most common form of enterprise represented, in this sector more

people worked for not-for-distributable profit organisations (registered charities, constituent

parts of local planning authorities, constituent parts of universities).

Most of the large employers in this sector had not-for-profit constitutions. This has been

identified as a potential barrier to effective competition within a market economy7.

7 Hinton, P. and Jennings, D. (2007) 'Quality management of archaeology in Great Britain: present practice and future challenges', in Willems, W.J.H. and Van den Dries, M. (eds) Quality Management in Archaeology, pp. 100-112, Oxford: Oxbow Books.


1.5 Location of Head and Subsidiary Offices

Respondents were asked about the locations of both their head office and of any subsidiary offices which were being included in their answers.

where is the head office of your organisation located?

head office location Archaeological Market Survey 2017 March 2017



East Midlands 5 9% 3 5% 5 9%

East of England 7 13% 9 16% 5 9%

Greater London 4 7% 4 7% 6 11%

North East England 1 2% 2 4% 0 0%

North West England 2 4% 4 7% 3 6%

South East England 8 15% 8 14% 8 15%

South West England 8 15% 7 12% 9 17%

West Midlands 4 7% 3 5% 2 4%

Yorkshire and the Humber 4 7% 2 4% 3 6%

Scotland 6 11% 9 16% 5 9%

Wales 3 6% 3 5% 3 6%

Northern Ireland 1 2% 0 0% 1 2%

Outside the UK – in the EU 1 2% 3 5% 3 6%

Outside the UK – not in EU 0 0%

total 54 57 53

The reported distribution of head offices has not changed substantially over the period from

2015 to 2017; variation over that time is likely to represent reporting or non-reporting by

respondents. There are organisations headquartered in all parts of the UK (and outside the

UK) working in the sector.

22 of 54 respondents in 2017 reported having subsidiary offices, comparable with 2016 when

27 of 57 did. The 27 respondents had a total of 49 subsidiary offices – much lower than the

75 subsidiary offices reported in 2016, but this variation is principally due to changes in the

specific organisations providing responses.

Of those that reported having subsidiary offices, the numbers of these ranged between one

and seven, with an average of 2.5 for each organisation that reported that they had such

offices.


are you also answering on behalf of any subsidiary offices? if so, please indicate where they are located?

subsidiary office location Archaeological Market Survey 2017 March 2017



East Midlands 4 8% 7 9% 4 6%

East of England 3 6% 7 9% 7 10%

Greater London 2 4% 8 11% 7 10%

North East England 2 4% 4 5% 7 10%

North West England 6 12% 6 8% 5 7%

South East England 6 12% 5 7% 8 11%

South West England 5 10% 8 11% 7 10%

West Midlands 0 0% 9 12% 7 10%

Yorkshire and the Humber 7 14% 8 11% 8 11%

Scotland 8 16% 7 9% 7 10%

Wales 3 6% 4 5% 2 3%

Northern Ireland 0 0% 1 1% 1 1%

outside the UK – in the EU 2 4% 1 1% 1 1%

outside the UK – not in EU 1 2%

total 49 75 71

total numbers of offices reported by location

all offices location head offices subsidiary offices total

East Midlands 5 4 9 9%

East of England 7 3 10 10%

Greater London 4 2 6 6%

North East England 1 2 3 3%

North West England 2 6 8 8%

South East England 8 6 14 14%

South West England 8 5 13 13%

West Midlands 4 0 4 4%

Yorkshire and the Humber 4 7 11 11%

Scotland 6 8 14 14%

Wales 3 3 6 6%

Northern Ireland 1 0 1 1%

outside the UK – in the EU 1 2 3 3%

outside the UK – not in EU 0 1 1 1%

total 54 49 103

The data cannot be disaggregated in terms of the numbers of individuals working at

different offices, so this means that the geographical distribution of staff can only be

presented on the basis of the head office locations.


In general, these figures can be seen as an accurate distribution of working archaeologists in

the UK, with the highest numbers of archaeologists occurring in the highest areas of general

population (Greater London and South-East England). South-West England was also highly

represented, with at least one relatively large company being headquartered there.

staff numbers by head office location

location Archaeological Market Survey 2017 March 2017



orgs staff orgs staff orgs staff

East Midlands 5 93.4 5% 3 91.2 5% 5 94.6 5%

East of England 6 172.2 8% 4 138.6 7% 4 99.8 5%

Greater London 4 594.6 29% 4 476 25% 5 485 26%

North East England 1 33 2% 2 108 6% 0 0 0%

North West England 2 27 1% 3 25 1% 2 18.5 1%

South East England 6 463.2 23% 5 385.4 20% 7 427.2 23%

South West England 6 307.5 15% 7 429.7 22% 8 352 19%

West Midlands 2 31.6 2% 3 37.8 2% 2 36.3 2%

Yorkshire and the Humber

3 24 1% 1 14 1% 1 19 1%

Scotland 5 224 11% 8 190.9 10% 4 216.3 12%

Wales 2 33 2% 2 16 1% 3 59 3%

Northern Ireland 1 3 <1% 0 0 0% 1 9 <1%

outside the UK – in EU 1 21 1% 0 0 0% 3 48.5 3%

outside the UK – not EU 0 0 0%

total 44 2027.5 42 1912.6 45 1865.3

(orgs = numbers of organisations providing staffing data & head office location)


1.6 Years Trading

Respondents were asked when their organisations began trading.

In which year did your organisation begin trading (in applied archaeology)?

started operating

Archaeological Market Survey 2016-17 March 2017



1900s 1 2%

1910s

1920s

1930s

1940s 1 2%

1950s

1960s 1 2% 1 2%

1970s 7 13% 8 15% 10 19%

1980s 4 8% 4 7% 7 13%

1990s 17 33% 15 27% 16 30%

2000s 10 19% 15 27% 11 21%

2010s 14 27% 12 22% 6 11%

total 52 55 53

No respondent organisations were formed before 1970, and the overwhelming majority

began trading since 1990. Nearly half of the respondent organisations had been founded

since 2000. As was the case in 2016, the median year for starting trading across the 52

respondents was 1999 (half had been trading for at least 18 years, and half less).

Examining the data for trading starts by organisational constitutions, organisations founded

in the 1970s are typically both registered charities and limited companies; limited companies

have become the preferred model over time, with the majority of organisations founded in

the decades since 2000 using this model.

foundation dates by constitutional bases

plc ltd company

charity part of lpa part of university

other

1970s 4 4 1 1

1980s 2 1 2

1990s 7 2 1 3 4

2000s 8 1 1

2010s 10 1 3

(nb some organisations checked more than one constitutional base)


2 STAFF NUMBERS

Respondents were asked about staffing levels on March 31st 2017, covering both UK and

non-UK based staff. They were also asked about non-UK based staff, the types of contracts

used, relative levels of staff turnover and whether they thought departing staff had left the

sector or not. They were also asked for retrospective data to ensure consistency with the

previous Archaeological market survey 2016.

By comparing like-with-like figures (employment figures provided by individual employers

for the numbers of staff they employed in 2017 and 2016), it is estimated that the sectoral

workforce (commercial, applied archaeology) grew by a total of 13.2% in the year since the

previous survey (by comparison, the sectoral workforce grew by 9.9% in the previous year).

Separately, the number of archaeologists providing curatorial services to local planning

authorities (technically, the number of full-time equivalent “archaeological specialists

providing advice to local authorities”) in England fell by 3.3% in the year to the beginning of

20168.

No figures are available for the numbers of archaeologists working in “other” contexts

(neither commercial nor curatorial), and so those figures have had to be assumed to have

remained unchanged.

When figures from these three sources are combined, it is estimated that the entire

archaeological profession working in the UK grew over the course of financial year 2016-17

from a total of 5,755 to 6,253 professional archaeologists on 31st March 2017, an increase of

8.7%.

8 Lloyd-James, O. 2017.The Ninth Report on Local Authority Staff Resources. Historic England / Association of



report-la-staff-resources.pdf/




2.1 Employment

The survey asked a series of questions about staffing levels, enquiring about the numbers of

staff working on 31st March 2017 and asking how many of them were fee-earners.

Respondents were also asked about non-UK based fee-earning staff.

Following the UK government’s 2016 decision to take the UK out of the European Union, a

new question was introduced regarding the nationalities of staff members, primarily to

identify how many were EU citizens.

2.1.1 Total Staff

How many full-time staff were based in your UK offices on 31 March 2017?

Please include all full-time or full-time equivalent staff, together with part-time staff, using estimates of full-time equivalency - for example, a member of staff working 2.5 days a week should be counted as 0.5.

How many UK members of staff (FTE) did your organisation have one year ago, on 31 March 2016 - the census date for the previous Heritage Market Survey?

total UK staff (managerial, professional, technical and administrative)




Mar 17 Mar 16 Mar 16 Mar 15 Mar 15 Mar 14

number providing data 48 42 42 42 45 42

total 2110 1772.38 1912.55 1740.41 1865.29 1468.56

average 43.965 42.20 46.65 42.45 41.45 34.97

Data are also presented for comparison purposes that were gathered in the predecessor

Archaeological Market Survey 2016 and the Archaeological Market Survey 2015 (which both

collected directly comparable data from FAME Member Organisations and CIfA Registered

Organisations.

Directly comparing data from the 42 organisations that provided data to this survey for both

March 2017 and March 2016 shows that their total workforces increased in size by 13.2% in

the year between the survey dates (in absolute terms, thirteen had smaller workforces,

fourteen had not changed in size and fifteen had grown; these figures show that the total

growth has not been evenly distributed, with the companies that grew taking on significantly

more staff than the numbers that were lost by the companies that became smaller).

This increase in workforce size – of 13.2% over one year - can be taken as a benchmark for

the overall growth of the applied archaeological sector’s workforce in 2016-17. This is a

significant amount of growth, an increase in the rate of growth reported in 2016 (9.9%).

On this basis, it is estimated that in total 4,351 people were working in the commercial

archaeology sector in March 2017.


2.1.2 Staff Nationalities

Of your UK-based staff, how many were:


British (UK subjects) 1,744.05 83%

Nationals of other EU states 305.6 15%

Nationals of other countries (non-UK, non-EU) 40.2 2%

total 2,089.85

n=45

15% of people working in UK applied archaeology in 2017 are EU citizens; a further 2% of the

archaeological workforce are neither from the UK nor the EU.

At the time of the Profiling the Profession 2012-13 survey9, the last time comparable data

were gathered, 3% of the entire archaeological workforce’s countries of origin were

European Union states (other than the UK). A further 4% of the workforce in 2013 were

originally from countries in the rest of the world.

2.1.3 Total Fee Earners

As well as being asked about the total numbers of all staff, respondents were also asked

about the number of fee-earning staff, defined as “Fee-earners: members of staff whose time

can be billed to clients”.

UK-based fee earners working full-time

total staff total fee-earners

2028 1723.12 85.0%

n=41

Data only used from respondents providing positive numbers of staff and of fee-earners.

Fee earners therefore made up 85% of the workforce at the respondent organisations; this is

a decrease from the 2016 figure of 94% (and 91% in 2015)

2.1.4 Overseas Staff

Respondents were asked how many of their full-time staff were permanently based overseas

on 31st March 2017.

Only two respondents reported having fee-earners based outside the UK, with a total of 20.1

FTE staff. The numbers of fee-earners permanently based outside the UK have varied

considerably over the years that these data have been collected, owing to different

respondent organisations answering this question each year.

One of the two organisations that identified that they had fee-earners outside the UK

reported having more non-UK fee-earners than were based in the UK.

9 Aitchison , K. & Rocks-Macqueen, D. 2013. Archaeology Labour Market Intelligence. Profiling the

Profession 2012-13. http://www.landward.eu/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2013/10/Archaeology-Labour-

Market-Intelligence-Profiling-the-Profession-2012-13.pdf. Table 81.

http://www.landward.eu/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2013/10/Archaeology-Labour-Market-Intelligence-Profiling-the-Profession-2012-13.pdf

http://www.landward.eu/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2013/10/Archaeology-Labour-Market-Intelligence-Profiling-the-Profession-2012-13.pdf


Number of fee-earners permanently based outside the UK

fee-earners outside UK fee earners in UK

(only organisations with non-UK fee earners)

n=

2017 20.1 20.2 2

2016 10.5 253.7 4

2015 21 72 3

2.1.5 Total Employment in UK Archaeology

This is the only part of this report which incorporates data from sources other than the survey of CIfA Registered Organisations and FAME members.

The most recent comprehensive survey of employment in all areas of UK archaeology was Archaeology Labour Market Intelligence: Profiling the Profession 2012-13, which incorporated data from State of the Archaeological Market December 2012.

Subsequent iterations of the survey of FAME members and CIfA Registered Organisations in 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16 allowed these data to be updated, and now this report presents an updated estimate of the total number of people working in applied, commercial archaeology, which can be combined with the most recent estimates for curatorial archaeology10 to produce an overall estimate for the entire sector in 2017.

Extrapolating from results received on the assumption that the reporting FAME members and CIfA ROs represent the large part, but not the entirety, of commercial archaeology (as identified in Profiling the Profession 2012-13, the last time that data were gathered from non-FAME / CIfA RO operators), this report estimates that 4,351 individuals were working in commercial archaeology in March 2017, an increase of 498 individuals (13.2%) over the period since March 2016. This represents continuing rapid growth in commercial archaeology which the sector has been experiencing from 2014 onwards, and the commercial sector’s staffing levels in 2017 are higher than the peak recorded in 2008 (immediately before economic deterioration began to affect the sector in that year).

The most recently published survey of staffing in local planning authorities in England11 considered that the number of archaeologists advising LPAs in England in early 2017 was 262.76, a decrease of 3.3% over the previous year; there is not believed to have been an equivalent rate of change outside England. This represents a loss of 8.9 FTE posts. There are currently fewer people employed in curatorial archaeology than at any time since this series of surveys began. In total, 407 people are considered to be working in curatorial archaeology across the entire UK.

As no new data are available for archaeological employment in “other” sectors, the figures from Archaeology Labour Market Intelligence: Profiling the Profession 2012-13 (December 2012) are repeated unchanged here.

For all sectors combined there was a net increase of 8.7% in the number of people working in UK archaeology between March 2016 and March 2017.

10 Lloyd-James, O. 2017.The Ninth Report on Local Authority Staff Resources. Historic England / Association of



report-la-staff-resources.pdf/ 11 ibid.




total numbers of archaeologists in employment in the UK, 2007-2017

Aug

07

Oct

08

Jan

09

Apr

09

Jul

09

Oct

09

Jan

10

Apr

10

Jul

10

Oct

10

Jan

11

Apr

11

Oct

11

Apr

12

Dec

12

Mar

14

Mar

15

Mar

16

Mar

17

curatorial 512 505 505 505 505 505 505 485 485 485 485 442 442 440 485 439 459 416 407

other 2105 2105 2105 2105 2105 2105 2105 2105 2105 2105 2105 2105 2105 2105 1495 1495 1495 1495 1495

commercial 4036 3906 3561 3323 3472 3526 3270 3404 3669 3333 3189 3225 3399 3467 2812 2896 3498 3844 4351

total 6653 6516 6171 5933 6082 6136 5880 5994 6259 5923 5779 5772 5946 6012 4792 4830 5452 5755 6253

In predecessor reports, the total number of “other” posts was left unchanged between the Profiling the Profession census points in August 2007 and December 2012. In this table, the reduction in numbers in this category between those dates has now been distributed to represent steady, progressive change over time rather than as a sudden transformation in December 2012.

Following the global economic downturn of 2008 and an associated loss of jobs in UK

archaeology, post-collapse growth in UK archaeological employment began, slowly, in 2013-

14, rapidly accelerated in 2014-15 and the sector as a whole has continued to experience

rapid growth in staff numbers, driven by the commercial sector, which has continued to add

more jobs than are being lost year-on-year in curatorial archaeology.

These curatorial losses are significant, as an overwhelming majority of respondents to this

survey, together with surveys conducted in 2014, 2015 and 2016 considered that “a shortage

of heritage staff in LPAs is a major constraint on heritage projects” (7, Perceptions below).

Since 2011, the number of curatorial posts has decreased by 19%. However, commercial

archaeology has continued to grow despite this perceived constraint.


2.2 Contracts

how many of your members of staff were working on each of the following types of contract or agreement on 31 March 2017?

full-time part-time total

permanent 1369.65 92.7% 108.3 7.3% 1477.95 76.7%

fixed term 386 97.5% 10 2.6% 396 20.5%

casual 13 92.9% 1 7.1% 14 0.7%

volunteer 0 0.00% 40 100.0% 40 2.1%

total 1768.65 91.7% 159.3 8.3% 1927.95

n=43 (nb – percentages read horizontally across rows, not vertically down columns, except for total column)

Data were received on staff contracts from 43 respondents, relating to the contracts or

working agreements held by over 1900 employees or volunteers.

Over three-quarters of staff were on permanent contracts, just over 20% on fixed term

(temporary) contracts, very few were ‘casual’ staff or volunteers were reported. These figures

are very similar to the results in 2016 and 2015.

92% of employees were on full-time contracts, and 77% of those people were permanently

engaged. Part-time workers were also more likely to have permanent contracts than to be

working on fixed-term contracts.

Please note the discrepancy between the total number of staff calculated on the basis of

reported contracts and the figure reported under 3.1.1, Total Staff above is because fewer

respondents provided data on whether staff were on full-or part-time contracts.

In comparison with the equivalent data from 2015-16 (below), the overall percentage of staff

who were on permanent contracts remained almost unchanged, as was the case when

comparing 2015 with 2014. This supports the view that the ongoing increase in jobs seen

since 2014-15 and continued in 2015-16 and 2016-17 was not simply a response to an

increase in short-term fieldwork, as that would likely be represented by a disproportionate

increase in the percentage of fixed-term posts (the 2016 figures are presented below for

comparison).

how many of your members of staff were on each of the following types of contract on 31 March 2016?

full-time part-time Total

permanent 1107 91.6% 102 8.4% 1209 73.9%

fixed term 340 92.6% 27 7.4% 367 22.4%

casual 35 81.4% 8 18.6% 43 2.6%

volunteer 3 18.8% 13 81.3% 16 1.0%

total 1485 90.8% 150 9.2% 1635

n=38 from Archaeological Market Survey 2016


2.3 Staff Turnover

Respondents were asked about the relative (not absolute) levels of staff turnover in the

period since the previous survey.

What level of staff turnover did you experience between 31 March 2016 and 31 March 2017?

Staff turnover Archaeological Market Survey 2017 March 2017



none (all current staff were working for us one year ago)

0 0% 13 33% 6 13%

some (up to 10% of current staff were not working for us one year ago)

3 43% 11 28% 21 47%

moderate (up to 25% of current staff were not working for us one year ago)

2 29% 11 28% 10 22%

considerable (over 25% of current staff were not working for us one year ago)

2 29% 5 13% 8 18%

total 7 40 45

The number of respondents providing data on staff turnover (or absence of turnover)

dropped considerably in 2016-17.

It is possible that the low level of response to this question stemmed from both the growth

of the sector may have meant that few people moved from one employer to another, and

that where organisations had expanded, with new staff joining, respondents had disregarded

this question (as might be suggested by two of the comments to 2.4, Staff Lost From the

Sector, below).


2.4 Staff Lost From the Sector

Respondents were asked whether they believed that staff who had formerly worked for them

were still working in archaeology or not.

If you lost staff in the period between 31 March 2016 and 31 March 2017, do you believe that these people left the profession or stayed within it with different employers?

staff destinations Archaeological Market Survey 2017 March 2017



all found alternative employment within archaeology

1 14% 1 4% 10 29%

most found alternative employment within archaeology

3 43% 16 67% 14 40%

even split between leaving the profession and finding alternative employment within archaeology

2 29% 4 17% 6 17%

most left the profession 0 0% 0 0% 2 6%

all left the profession 1 14% 3 13% 3 9%

total 7 24 35

As was the case in 2016 and 2015, most respondents thought that all, or most, of the people

who had left their employ were still working in archaeology but for different employers,

which continues to repeat a pattern previously identified, emphasising that a major

component of staff turnover is made up of people moving within the sector.

Comments received:

1 left the profession

Business is currently closing down, explaining the drop in staff over last year

Most of the turnover has been new staff joining

One member of staff retired

We had hardly any leavers - the turned over staff are new joiners


2.5 Salaries

Respondents were asked whether salaries had typically risen or fallen during the 2016-17

financial year. This was specifically not a question about total salary bills, as those would be

directly influenced by the number of personnel on the payroll.

did salaries at your organisation typically rise or fall between March 2016 and March 2017? (NB - not total salary bill)

when comparing changes to inflation, please consider the rate of inflation at the date of the salary settlement

salary changes Archaeological Market Survey 2017 March 2017



rose by above inflation 0 0% 22 54% 24 53%

rose by inflation 4 57% 12 29% 9 20%

unchanged 2 29% 7 17% 11 24%

fell by up to 10% 1 14% 0 0% 0 0%

fell by over 10% 0 0% 0 0% 1 2%

total 7 41 45

Very few respondents answered this question. From this limited base, it can be seen that for

the third year in succession, the majority of respondents reported salaries as having risen by

inflation or above. The CPI rate of inflation in March 2017 was 2.3%12; respondents were

asked to compare changes with inflation at the date of the salary settlement.

As the sample size is so small, examining the average sizes of the workforce at the

organisations where data on salary changes are available has relatively little value. The data

for 2016 are presented below for comparison.

salary changes March 2017 organisations individuals average size of workforce

rose by above inflation 0 0 0

rose by inflation 4 495 123.75

unchanged 2 4 2

fell by up to 10% 1 0.75 0.75

fell by over 10% 0 0 0

salary changes March 2016 organisations individuals average size of workforce

rose by above inflation 22 1546.55 70.30

rose by inflation 12 293.27 24.44

unchanged 6 44.9 7.48

fell by up to 10% 0 0 0

fell by over 10% 0 0 0

12 http://www.rateinflation.com/inflation-rate/uk-historical-inflation-rate accessed 11th August 2017

http://www.rateinflation.com/inflation-rate/uk-historical-inflation-rate


2.6 Charge-out Rates

Respondents were asked about any changes to their charge-out rates in the year ending 31st

March 2017, and then about how they anticipated they would change in the next year.

How did your charge out rates change in the year to the end of March 2017?

- by what percentage did your charge-out rates increase (+) or decrease (-) over the year ending 31 March 2017?

- by what percentage did you or do you anticipate that your rates will increase (+) or decrease (-) over the year ending 31 March 2018?

reported change to March 2017

anticipated change to March 2017 (reported in 2016)

anticipated change to March 2018

range -5% to 10% -10% to 20% 0% to 10%

mean 3.1% 4.3% 3.0%

median 2.5% 5.0% 2.0%

mode 0% (10 responses) 5.0% (10 responses) 0% (12 responses)

n= 39 35 39

Charge-out rates rose by an average of 3.1% in the year to March 2017; a year previously,

they had been expected to rise by 4.3% (this is consistent with the previous pattern, where

the average increases in charge-out rates have consistently been less than were anticipated a

year before). Looking forward, respondents expect their charge-out rates to rise by 3.0% in

the year to March 2018.

The March 2017 annual UK inflation rate (CPI) was 2.3%13; 51% of respondents (20 of 39)

increased their charge-out rates in 2016-17 by more than this amount.

13 http://www.rateinflation.com/inflation-rate/uk-historical-inflation-rate accessed 11th August 2017

http://www.rateinflation.com/inflation-rate/uk-historical-inflation-rate


3 FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE

Respondents were asked a series of questions about their organisation’s financial

performance in financial year 2016-17 and expectations. It was recognised that some

respondents might be reluctant to release such information (even though the responses

were anonymous).

• Overall, the financial performance statistics suggest that the sector may be

approaching maximum capacity – it had not grown in terms of turnover in 2016-17,

despite staff complements increasing (meaning productivity was falling), and profit

levels had stabilised.

• The sector had positive future financial expectations – although these expectations

were not as ambitious as they had been one year before.

• Average financial turnovers decreased from 2015-16 to 2016-17.

• Reported profit (or surplus) levels stabilised at the same levels as the previous year,

but continued to be relatively low.

• More than 80% of income was generated from the private sector; this has continued

to increase in importance year-on-year.

• In terms of business activity, work generated by residential development continued

to very clearly be the biggest market sector.

3.1 Turnover

What was your annual turnover (in £) in financial year 2016-17?

Please enter full numbers of pounds, e.g. 1250000, not decimal fractions of millions etc

if your accounting period does not run from April to March, please indicate fee income for nearest 12-month period for which audited figures are available, making clear which period they cover.

- your UK turnover in year ending 31 March 2017 - your turnover from non-UK sources (including Republic of Ireland) in year ending 31 March 2017

range mean median n=

UK turnover £33,000 to £13,500,000 £2,348,383 £643,500 32

non-UK turnover £0 to £80,000 £5,318 £0 33; 29 reported zero return

2016 figures (from Archaeological Market Survey 2016)


UK turnover £15,100 to £12,484,000 £2,928,146 £755,618 24

non-UK turnover £0 to £150,000 £48,219 £0 25; 20 reported zero return

Respondent organisations typically turned over £643,500 in 2016-17 (half generated more

than this amount of revenue, half less). For most respondents, none of this income was

generated outside the UK.

The average (mean) UK turnover for an applied archaeology company in 2016-17 was

£2.35m, a decrease of 19.8% on the figure reported for 2015-16 (although it must be noted

that the 2015-16 figures represented a calculated 55.7% increase on the year before; this


reported high levels of turnover and of profitability suggest that 2015-16 may have been an

abnormal year).

It should also be noted that the decrease in the median figure was 14.8%.

UK turnover 2016-17 2015-16

<£250,000 8 25% 5 20%

£250,000 -> £500,000 4 13% 3 12%

£500,000 -> £1m 8 25% 7 28%

£1m -> £2.5m 6 19% 3 12%

£2.5m -> £5m 1 3% 0 0%

£5m -> £10m 2 6% 4 16%

>=£10m 3 9% 3 12%

total 32 25

Multiplying the mean figure by the total survey population (of 97 organisations) would

suggest that in 2016-17 the sector generated £228m of revenue; the comparable figure for

2015-16 was £296m.

annual (UK) turnover source

n= mean change

2016-17 32 £2.35m -19.8% Archaeological Market Survey 2017 March 2017

2015-16 24 £2.93m +55.7% Archaeological Market Survey 2016 March 2016

2014-15 37 £1.88m +14.5% Archaeological Market Survey 2015 March 2015

2013-14 20 £1.64m Heritage Market Survey 2014 March 2014

2012-13 no data available

2011-12 33 £1.71m -6.6% State of the Archaeological Market December 2012

2010-11 32 £1.83m -4.2% State of the Archaeological Market December 2012

2009-10 32 £1.91m State of the Archaeological Market December 2012

How was this income distributed by clients’ or funders’ locations within the UK?

total % number of respondents

with funding from that

country

England £66,648,128 88.4% 28

Scotland £5,511,650 7.3% 7

Wales £3,163,071 4.2% 9

Northern Ireland £5,400 <0.1% 1

total £66,468,128 n=32

Most companies did not generate any non-UK income, but those that did generated 0.6% of

turnover from those sources.


On average, respondents typically expected their turnover to increase by 2.5% in 2017-18;

the average expectations for 2016-17 were for increase in turnover of 10.8%, and the 2015-

16 expectation was for an increase of 7.6%.

predicted % change in turnover between years ending 31 March 2017 and 31 March 2018


anticipated change -90% to 33% +2.5% +5.0% 32

31 organisations provided data for both financial turnover and numbers of staff; on average

these organisations employed 53.1 members of staff each, with an average turnover per staff

member of £45,309, a decrease from 2015-16 of 0.7%. Financial turnover per member of staff

is a proxy measure of productivity.

average turnover per member of staff

2016-17 £45,309

2015-16 £45,615

2014-15 £45,914

2013-14 £56,237

2012-13 no data available

2011-12 £53,271

23 respondents provided data on their contributions to the community, public archaeology

and education which had not been paid for directly by a client. On average these

contributions were £26,545, an increase of 3.2% on from the 2015-16 figure of £25,728.

These contributions equated to 0.9% of those organisations’ average annual turnovers

(matching the calculated figure of 0.9% for 2015-16).

your contribution to the community, public archaeology and education which has not been paid for directly by a client


non-client

contributions

£500 - £120,000 £26,545 £5,000 32; 9 reported

zero returns


3.2 Profit Levels

Respondents were asked about the levels of profit (or surplus, for not-for-profit enterprises)

realised in financial year 2016-7.

your surplus (plus or minus) in the year ending 31 March 2017

range mean % of mean turnover

median n=

surplus 2016-17

-£286,000 to £1,000,000 £121,252 5.2% £43,000 31

surplus 2015-16

-£75,000 to £799,000 £154,438 5.2% £50,000 23

Profit levels decreased in 2016-17 when compared with the year before in terms of the average absolute levels of profit, but remained unchanged in terms of that as an average percentage of turnover. Historically, profit levels had increased to 5.2% in 2015-16 from 2.5% in 2014-15 and 1.9% in 2013-14.

In 2015-16 it was recognised that nearly 30% of respondents had reported profit levels over 10% which was considered to be a high rate of profitability, indicating that the sector had the resources to start investing and developing. In 2016-17, the percentage of respondents reporting these levels of profitability had increased.

While most respondents reported being in profit, three of the 31 organisations responding in 2017 reported negative figures, representing absolute losses, with another three reporting neither surplus nor loss.

level of profit

as % of

turnover

(surplus)

Archaeological

Market Survey 2017

March 2017

Archaeological

Market Survey 2016

March 2016

Archaeological

market survey 2015

March 2015

>25% 1 3% 3 14% 0 0%

10-25% 13 41% 3 14% 4 12%

5-10% 4 13% 4 19% 6 18%

<5% 14 44% 11 52% 23 70%

Total 32 21 33

Data only used from respondents providing turnover and profit/surplus figures


3.3 Funding Sources (areas of activity as turnover)

Please estimate your UK turnover from the following sources in the year ending 31 March 2017

n= total mean % 2016%

central government departments and agencies 16 £5,340,700 £333,794 7% 3%

other public bodies (including universities, public-private partnerships and local enterprise partnerships)

20 £1,398,100 £69,905 2% 4%

community groups (including HLF projects, town and parish councils and neighbourhood forums)

19 £1,501,440 £79,023 2% 5%

district, county or unitary councils (local planning authorities)

22 £3,650,900 £165,950 5% 3%

national agencies (HE/EH, HES, Cadw etc) 23 £2,256,900 £98,126 3% 6%

private sector clients (including third parties) 31 £62,297,309 £2,009,591 81% 79%

aggregate total £76,445,349

Of 31 respondents to this question, most had secured some income from each of the six

defined areas of funding and all had received funding from private sector clients, which

represented the overwhelming majority (81%) of the total estimated income reported; this

was an increase on the 2016 figure of 79%, which in turn was an increase on the 2015 figure

of 75%.

In comparison with 2015-16, the distribution of funding sources has remained broadly

constant, although the percentage of funds received from central government departments

and (non-heritage) agencies increased while funding from community groups including HLF

projects and from national heritage agencies fell.


3.4 Market Sectors

The survey sought detailed information on which market sectors were generating income for

the respondent organisations.

Please do not include non-UK turnover in this section

In the column headed "UK income", please indicate your UK income in the year ending 31 March 2017 for the work in each of the sectors listed.

To avoid double counting, please do not include fee income from any commission in more than one box. The total for this column must not exceed total fee income reported under turnover in the question above. If you are unsure about which sector to attribute a particular commission to, please refer to the Note to Respondents below.

category total % 2017 % 2016 range average n=

residential development £22,311,306 41.7% 53.4% £1,508 - £7,431,000

£1,174,279

19

commercial and industrial £9,596,060

17.9% 13.5% £15,000 - £5,000.000

£738,158

13

any other services not categorised above

£4,688,987

8.8% 0.6% £1,007 - £3,424,100

£520,999

5

transport £3,432,755

6.4% 10.3% £5,000 - £1,800,000

£228,850

14

Energy £3,058,835

5.7% 3.0% £5,000 - £1,318,000

£278,076

10

leisure, sport, entertainment and tourism

£2,894,740

5.4% 0.2% £20,000 -£85,000

£241,228

12

community projects and HLF £1,663,821

3.1% 2.1% £9381 - £1,200,000

£127,986

13

retail and town centres £977,915

1.8% 2.9% £2,775 - £400,000

£97,792

10

water supply £972,480

1.8% 2.4% £50,000 - £669,600

£138,926

5

minerals £844,618

1.6% 2.5% £20,000 - £197,600

£70,385

10

other research and public archaeology

£683,440

1.3% 0.5% £12,000 - £500,000

£113,907 8

education £584,602

1.1% 1.4% £5,000 - £204,200

£53,146

10

heritage conservation £548,791 1.0% 1.5% £10,000 - £257,200

£91,465

6

national agencies and university grants

£500,000

0.9% 2.2% £5,000 - £300,000

£71,429

4

Health £345,640

0.6% 1.2% £5,000 - £204,200

£43,205

6

assistance to LPAs in delivering development control services

£156,440

0.3% 0.2% £70,000 £26,073

3

local authority initiatives £107,302

0.2% 0.7% £7,302 - £100,000

£21,460

2

waste £92,330

0.2% 1.4% £13,000 -£500,000

£15,388

3


telecommunications £45,000 0.1% 0.0% £5,000 -£25,000

£6,429 3

aggregate total £53,505,062

Residential development continued to represent the largest market sector by far, but as an

aggregate percentage had dropped from 53.4% of income in 2015-16 to 41.7% in 2016-17.

The second largest market sector continued to be commercial and industrial; these two

sectors combined represented nearly 60% of the reported revenue of the respondent

organisations.

There was a marked increase in the relative importance of the catchall “any other services…”

category, and also of “leisure, sport, entertainment and tourism” – in both cases, these were

the result of single respondents having particularly high revenues from the sectors.

Respondents were also asked about turnover change by market sector. The question simply

asked whether turnover had increased, decreased or was unchanged for each market sector,

and what expectations were for the following year.

In the table below, the figures are aggregated results for each market sector, so they

represent measures of sentiment – for example, a figure of +100% would mean that every

respondent considered that turnover had increased in that sector, while a figure of 0%

means that the number reporting (or expecting) growth in a market sector was exactly

balanced by the number expecting decline.

In the two columns headed “2016-17” and “2017-18” please indicate whether your turnover in the UK market for each of the sectors listed grew, declined or was unchanged from the previous year in 2016-17 and whether you think it will grow, decline or be unchanged in 2017-18.

category 2016-17 reported

2017-18 Predicted

residential development +50% 20 +39% 18

commercial and industrial +33% 15 +13% 15

retail and town centres +10% 10 +44% 9

leisure, sport, entertainment and tourism +8% 12 ±0% 11

minerals +9% 11 +27% 11

waste ±0% 7 0% 7

transport +20% 15 +92% 13

energy +45% 11 -8% 12

telecommunications +13% 8 -11% 9

water supply ±0% 8 ±0% 9

education +20% 10 ±0% 10

health +13% 8 -11% 9

community projects and HLF +23% 13 +23% 13

national agencies and university grants ±0% 7 -14% 7

local authority initiatives +33% 6 -14% 7

other research and public archaeology +17% 6 +33% 6

heritage conservation +17% 6 +29% 7

assistance to LPAs in delivering development control services

+29% 7 ±0% 7

any other services not categorised above +30% 10 +9% 11


Very substantial numbers of respondents anticipate growth in 2017-18 in residential

development, retail and town centres – and above all, in transport, with a near universal

expectation of increased work deriving from transport development which can largely be

attributed to anticipated work on or relating to HS2.


4 FORMS OF CONTRACT

Which forms of client contract do you routinely use?

Check as many as apply

n= % of respondents using

exchange of letters / emails 19 70%

your own organisation’s standard t&c 19 70%

client’s standard t&c 16 59%

bespoke 13 48%

NEC3 (various – family of contracts) 7 26%

ICE (short form or alternative) 6 22%

none 2 7%

other 0 0%

n=27

27 respondents answered this question, most of which used more than one form of contract.

The two respondent that checked “none” also checked several other forms.

Externally standardised approaches (the Institution of Civil Engineers’ NEC3 or ICE short

form) were less frequently used than exchanges of letters, client or contractors’ own standard

terms and conditions, or bespoke forms of client contract.


5 BUSINESS CONFIDENCE

The sector grew in terms of workforce in 2016-17 while reporting reduced average financial

turnover, with indications that business confidence peaked in 2015 and has steadily declined

since.

Historically, in 2015 the sector was more confident than it had been at any time since 2008

(the start of this data collection exercise), but since then (following both the Brexit

referendum of June 2016 and the General Election of June 2017), levels of confidence have

declined.

In 2017, confidence was still high, but confidence was decreasing when compared with one

year before (when, in turn, the sector was not as confident as it had been in 2015).

• While respondents overwhelmingly expected to maintain or increase their staff levels

in the next year, they were not as confident of doing so as they had been in 2016.

• While there was overall confidence that market conditions would not deteriorate in

2017-18, the sector was not as confident about the future as it had been one year

before, and confidence had been declining since 2015.

• More respondents expect there to be no business failures in the sector than expected

some, and feelings in this area were more positive than they had been in 2016

• Respondents generally did not expect to expand their business in 2017-18. While

overall business confidence peaked in 2015, the level of expectation of business

expansion reached its peak in 2014.


5.1 Staffing Levels

At the end of March 2017, did you anticipate any changes to your staffing levels over the next year (to 31 March 2017)?

change in staffing




increase staff numbers

13 48% 15 60% 23 62%

maintain staff numbers

10 37% 9 36% 11 30%

lower staff numbers

4 15% 1 4% 3 8%

total 27 +33% 25 +56% 37 +54%

Don’t know or no answer excluded

Comments received:

Business is closing down

I am sole trader.

I do not have a glass ball

I have no plans to employ anyone other than myself

increase by 30%

Maintain or increase

Provided capacity is available.

Recruiting at all levels in the SE and Midlands

Stable core staff; increase in fixed term contract


From April 2012 to March 2016, the proportion of respondents who expected to maintain or

increase staff levels increased with every iteration of this survey.

In 2016-17, while the majority of respondents do still expect to either maintain or increase

their staff numbers, overall the sector is not as confident of retaining staff as it was at the

time of the previous survey in 2016.

Note the graph below represents the proportion of respondents that expected to either

increase or maintain their staff numbers, minus the number of respondents that expected to

lose staff – so positive results mean staff numbers are not expected to fall.

5.2 Market Conditions

On 31 March 2017, did you believe that market conditions would deteriorate over the next 12 months? (to 31 March 2018)

market conditions




the market will deteriorate

7 26% 6 21% 3 8%

the market will not deteriorate

15 56% 18 64% 31 84%

don't know 5 19% 4 14% 3 8%

total 27 +30% 28 +43% 37 +76%

In the 2014-15 survey, the sector was extremely confident that market conditions would not

deteriorate in 2015-16; this view was tempered considerably in 2015-16, and confidence

-100%

-80%

-60%

-40%

-20%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Jan

-09

May

-09

Sep

-09

Jan

-10

May

-10

Sep

-10

Jan

-11

May

-11

Sep

-11

Jan

-12

May

-12

Sep

-12

Jan

-13

May

-13

Sep

-13

Jan

-14

May

-14

Sep

-14

Jan

-15

May

-15

Sep

-15

Jan

-16

May

-16

Sep

-16

Jan

-17

market confidence


reduced further in 2016-17. However, a significant majority of respondents still thought that

the market would not deteriorate in the coming year.

Comments received:

Absolutely not

although this view assumed that large infrastructure

Brexit impact on business confidence; delays to govt infrastructure programme

house building still strong

Housing may deteriorate; but infrastructure should increase

Impact from Brexit negotiation uncertainty

No option for yes and no - some markets will improve others will decline

While some sectors may slow or contract, infrastructure will drive high levels of demand.

Will depend on government policy and willingness to invest in development to maintain economic growth. There is sufficient planned development to keep everyone busy so that is a cause for optimism; however things are undoubtedly fragile with any number of crises on the horizon which could have a sudden and devastating effect on the economy and/or archaeological work

In every survey since December 2012, more respondents have considered that market

conditions would improve than would deteriorate, and overall confidence in the sector’s

market conditions had been increasing from September 2011 until March 2015, which

represented a high-point of confidence. Since 2015, confidence in future market conditions

has steadily declined.

5.3 Businesses Ceasing Trading

From the start of this series of surveys in 2008 until 2014, more respondents expected some

archaeological practices to cease trading in the next 12 months than did not. In the earliest

iterations of the survey, an overwhelming – near universal – majority of respondents

expected that this would happen.

In March 2015, for the first time in this series of surveys, more respondents did not believe

that any businesses would fail than did; this was still the case in March 2016, and in 2017

businesses were more confident that no archaeological practices will cease trading in the

next 12 months than they had been one year before.


At the end of March 2017, did you expect any archaeological practices to cease trading over the next 12 months?

businesses ceasing trading Archaeological Market Survey 2017 March 2017



yes 6 23% 7 26% 6 16%

no 14 54% 10 37% 21 57%

don’t know 6 23% 10 37% 10 27%

total 26 +31% 27 +11% 37 +41%

The title of the graph below emphasises that positive figures reflect an expectation that no

businesses in the sector will fail in the next year.

Comments received:

Normal wastage from organisations unable to make a return.

not sure if any did but there are certainly some outfits with poor business sense, poor employment conditions and shoddy work that probably should have no place in a modern professional world

Sustainability is not built into every organization's cost plan; charge-out rates can be insufficient and fixed price set cost of job too low; contract penalties; business strategy for larger organizations to let subsidiary companies go into receivership

This is statistically the case

We know that one went into administration but this is unlikely to be as a result of market conditions!


5.4 Expansion

Respondents were asked about planning for future business expansion.

Did you have any plans to expand your business significantly over twelve months from March 2017 (e.g. in premises, vehicles, capital equipment)?

expansion plans Archaeological Market Survey 2017 March 2017



yes 10 38% 12 50% 21 57%

no 15 58% 10 42% 15 41%

don’t know 1 4% 2 8% 1 3%

total 26 -20% 24 +8% 37 +16%

For the first time since December 2012, more respondents were not planning for business

expansion in the next year than were.

Relative enthusiasm for business expansion peaked at the time of the March 2014 survey,

and has steadily declined since.

Historically, future expansion plans have mapped well against the reality of changes in staff

numbers; the sentiment expressed for expansion began to become more positive than

negative in March 2012, and the data collected from the next survey (December 2012)

showed that the sector had started re-growing from that point onwards.

March 2014 represented a peak in positive expectations for the year ahead, and in 2014-15

staff numbers increased by more than at any other survey period. In March 2015,

expectations were still positive, but more modest – and staff numbers did continue to

increase in the next year, but not at the rate experienced in 2014-15.

Because expansion plans are slowing does not automatically mean that there will be a

reduction in staff numbers in the next year, but it is an indicator of the cautiousness of the

sector at the point of the survey.


Comments received:

30% growth

All of the above are likely

But workload indicated short-term growth in staff numbers

Forward plan assumes 20% growth

There are plans to invest if we can (it is years since we have been able to). Much depends on how confident we become around increasing surplus and meeting income targets


6 SKILLS, TRAINING AND QUALIFICATIONS

The survey sought to identify which areas of skills were being lost from the sector, where

skills were being bought in (skills shortages) and where organisations were seeking to

address the issue through training (skills gaps).

Throughout this part of the report, figures relate to the respondents who have experienced a

particular, specific change in the previous year as a percentage of all who responded to each

general question. For example, in 2016-17, 12 respondents had lost skills in some way in the

previous year; of these, 7 had lost fieldwork skills, so the percentage presented is 58% (7/12).

This does not mean that 58% of fieldwork skills have been lost from the sector, nor does it

mean that 58% of all organisations in commercial archaeology lost fieldwork skills.

Respondents were also asked in general terms whether they considered there were particular

areas with skills problems across the sector.

6.1 Areas of Skills Losses

For the first time since this survey series began in 2008, fieldwork skills were not the area

where skills loss was most frequently identified (although 50% of respondents to this

question did report losing skills in this area).

Desk-based or environmental assessment was the area where most respondents identified

that they had lost skills.

This switch to pre-fieldwork skills being the area where companies are most likely to lose

skills is significant, as it can be interpreted as meaning respondents are generally retaining or

expanding their fieldwork skills base, but struggling to retain the desk-based research and

assessment skills. On the assumption that skills are largely lost by members of staff moving

to different employers, it suggests that there is increasing competition for both desk-based

assessment skills and for skilled fieldworkers.

In the twelve months to the end of March 2017, did your organisation lose skills in any of these areas?




desk-based or environmental assessment

7 58% 4 36% 5 28%

fieldwork (invasive or non-invasive)

6 50% 6 55% 13 72%

post-fieldwork analysis 4 33% 4 36% 6 33%

advice to clients 3 25% 1 9% 4 22%

data management 2 17% 2 18% 4 22%

artefact or ecofact conservation

2 17% 2 18% 1 6%

other 0 0% 1 9% 2 11%



6.2 Areas of Skills Buy-in

As in 2016 and 2015, many more respondents reported buying-in skills than had reported

losing them. These are areas of skills shortages, skills that an organisation does not have but

that it buys in from external providers.

Both fieldwork and conservation skills were bought in by nearly two-thirds of respondents,

and post-fieldwork analysis was bought in by nearly half. In 2016, post-fieldwork analysis had

been the skill most frequently bought in, and in 2017 nearly half of the respondents who

bought in skills did so in this area.

The continuing high levels of demand for fieldwork and post-fieldwork skills are linked to the

high levels of fieldwork activity being undertaken.

While desk-based or environmental assessment was identified as the skills area being lost

most often, very few respondents were buying this in to backfill for those losses – so this was

not being perceived as a skills shortage,

This series of surveys has consistently shown over time that artefact or ecofact conservation

is a skill that is normally bought in from external providers. Conservation was rarely reported

as a skill being lost by employers, because this was now very much the norm to be provided

by external providers – although there was increasing demand for training in this area,

suggesting either that companies want to bring this back in-house or that external capacity

to provide this was beginning to be stretched.

In the twelve months to the end of March 2017, did your organisation have to buy-in skills in any of these areas?

skills bought in Archaeological Market Survey 2017 March 2017




16 64% 14 56% 19 61%


16 64% 14 56% 10 32%


Other 4 16% 6 24% 3 10%



3 12% 5 20% 2 6%

providing advice to clients 2 8% 3 12% 0 0%


“other” skills reported as being bought in:

HR, Financial, Training

Scientific dating (C14), medieval pottery


6.3 Areas of Training

Areas where organisations address skills deficits by investing in training their staff are skills

gaps.

As was the case in 2016, the majority of respondents that invested in training invested in

developing their team’s fieldwork, post-fieldwork analysis and desk-based / environmental

assessment skills, the three areas where skills were most commonly being reported as being

lost (so therefore these were skills gaps, skills that existing staff needed but lacked, that were

being tackled by investment in training).

As has been seen in each survey since 2014, a much higher proportion of FAME members

and CIfA Registered Organisations have been investing in training while they were

simultaneously increasing the number of people on their payrolls.

When areas of skills training are compared to the areas where outside expertise was being

bought in (skills shortages – where employers cannot find staff with the relevant skills),

fieldwork and post-fieldwork skills are being both bought in and internally trained up.

Desk-based or environmental assessment and providing advice to clients are much more

likely to be areas where staff will be trained than outside expertise bought in, and although

there was increasing investment in training for conservation in 2017, it continues to be much

more likely to be bought in.

In the twelve months to the end of March 2017 did your organisation invest in skills training in any of these areas?

training investment Archaeological Market Survey 2017 March 2017




16 67% 17 68% 20 65%



15 63% 14 56% 17 55%




8 33% 5 20% 9 29%

Other 4 17% 8 32% 5 16%


The following ‘other’ skills were identified as having been areas where organisations invested in training:

Contract Management and Health and Safety Advice

H&S training, management training

Public Enquiry training


6.4 Skills Issues Across the Sector

Respondents were asked about their perceptions of skills issues across the archaeological sector. The phrase “skills shortages” was used here in the questionnaire; this can have a technical definition relating to a problem skills area that is addressed through bringing in external expertise, but here was considered to refer to areas where there is a general under-provision of skilled labour.

Respondents identified fieldwork skills as being the area where most consider that there are skills issues across the sector, followed by post-fieldwork analysis. As in 2016 and 20155, these have been the key areas of concern, potentially reflecting difficulties recruiting during the ongoing fieldwork boom.

On 31 March 2017, did you think there were skills shortages across archaeological practice in any of these areas?

skills issues Archaeological Market Survey 2017 March 2017




17 74% 11 55% 18 67%



11 48% 7 35% 8 30%



6 26% 7 35% 9 33%


other 3 13% 7 35% 5 19%


“Other” areas where skills issues were identified:

Contract Management and Health and Safety Advice

Generally there is quite a low skills set across the board

Project Management

Respondent organisations’ views on skills issues across the sector continue to closely match

what they can identify within their own organisations – and so sector-wide skills issues mirror

individual organisations’ training needs. In 2016-17, fieldwork and post-fieldwork skills were

the areas where many organisations invested in training, and these were the areas where

skills issues were recognised across the sector.

This is very definitely a positive state of affairs, whereby employers are recognising and then

taking responsibility for addressing skills issues, rather than leaving them for outside bodies.


6.5 NVQ

The National Vocational Qualification in Archaeological Practice was first awarded in 2009

(the formal title for this qualification is now the Level 3 NVQ Certificate in Archaeological

Practice). Respondents were asked about whether they had previously supported a member

of staff gaining such a qualification, and whether they would consider doing so in the future.

On 31 March 2017, had you or were you considering supporting a member of staff to gain a vocational qualification in archaeological practice (NVQ)?

NVQ support




have supported

would consider in future

have supported


have supported


yes 7 33% 12 75% 8 31% 13 54% 15 60% 11 34%

no 14 67% 3 19% 18 69% 7 29% 3 12% 21 66%

don’t know

0 0% 1 6% 0 0% 4 17% 7 28% 0 0%

total 21 16 26 24 25 32

Levels of support for the NVQ in Archaeological Practice from FAME members and CIfA Registered

Organisations remain high, with a relative increase in the proportion of respondents who were

prepared to consider supporting a candidate in the future.

6.6 Apprenticeship

On 31 March 2017, had you or were you considering supporting a member of staff to undertake an Apprenticeship in Historic Environment Practice?

Apprenticeship Support



have supported would consider have supported would consider

yes 2 11% 12 71% 1 4% 11 46%

no 17 89% 2 12% 23 96% 8 33%

don’t know 0 0% 3 18% 0 0% 5 21%

total 19 17 4 24

The Historic Environment Practice Trailblazer Apprenticeships programme launched in

201514, with the Apprenticeships in historic environment practice being still under

development in 201715. This means that no specifically archaeological

Apprenticeships had been delivered at the time of the survey; respondents may have been

supporting generic Apprenticeships in admin, business finance etc, but not yet supporting

formal Apprentices in Historic Environment Practice in the workplace – and an increasing

proportion of respondents would consider doing so in the future.

14 Shepherd, N. 2016. Archaeological Apprenticeships.

http://www.famearchaeology.co.uk/2016/03/archaeological-apprenticeships/ 15 Kate Geary pers. comm., 1st September 2017

http://www.famearchaeology.co.uk/2016/03/archaeological-apprenticeships/


7 PERCEPTIONS

Respondents were asked about their perceptions of particular issues.

On 31 March 2017, would you have agreed or disagreed with the following statements?

Individual responses will be aggregated in any survey report and your views will not be attributed to you without your permission

strongly disagree

disagree Unsure agree strongly agree

score 1 2 3 4 5

the economic climate for development will improve over the next 12 months

2 8 11 4 1

2017 average 2.77 (unsure) decrease on 2016


your heritage team will grow within the next 12 months

3 4 6 9 3


2016 average 3.56 (agree) decrease on 2015

your heritage team will contract within the next 12 months

3 15 5 3 1

2017 average 2.41 (disagree) increase on 2016

2016 average 2.12 (disagree) increase on 2015

late payment of bills is an increasingly significant problem for your business

0 8 2 12 4

2017 average 3.46 (unsure) increase on 2016


non-payment of invoices has been a significant problem for your business

2 13 2 5 3


2016 average 2.27 (disagree) decrease on 2015

current national planning policy frameworks are making it easier to justify heritage work and revenue levels

1 6 5 12 1



current national planning policy frameworks weaken the case for heritage work and revenue levels

2 11 6 3 2



a shortage of heritage staff in LPAs is a major constraint on heritage projects

0 2 2 15 7


2017 average 4.04 (agree) decrease on 2016

2016 average 4.19 (agree) increase on 2015

In the table above, results have been aggregated, with each “strongly agree” response

scoring five points, each “agree” scoring four, etc., and then an average of the responses

calculated. Hence, for the average result to be 5.00, then every respondent would have

strongly agreed with a statement, but if the average was 1.00 then every respondent would

have strongly disagreed. The calculated average for 2017 is then categorised by which

response that average is closest to, and compared with the 2016 scores.

Further comments on Perceptions:

Certain clients (e.g. minerals) operate very long payments terms (90 days from scanning of invoices). We've learnt to deal with it, but it does affect cash flow.

Implementation of NPPF still very inconsistent area to area

"National planning unsure as it isn't so much the legislation but how they are used + things have got a bit weaker

The current national planning policy frameworks are OK - it's what's proposed that will undermine our work e.g. the Planning and Infrastructure Bill. The effects of the Housing and Planning Act 2016 are not yet clear.

Respondents were unsure whether the economic climate for development would improve in

the next 12 months, and their views had become less positive than they were in 2016, when

in turn they were less confident than they had been in 2015. This should be considered

alongside respondents’ answers to the Business Confidence question on Market Conditions

[5.2 above], where the overall view was also positive, but more cautious than a year before.

Typically, they were not sure that their heritage teams would grow in the next year, and were

a little less confident of this than they had been in 2016. They were confident that their

teams would not contract in size, but, again, views were slightly less positive than they had

been in 2016.

Late payment of bills was a problem for an increasing number of respondents, as they felt

more concerned about this than they had in 2016. Non-payment was becoming more of a

concern, as respondents felt this was more of a problem than in 2016.

Respondents were unsure, but tended to agree with the statement that “current national

planning policy frameworks are making it easier to justify heritage work and revenue levels“,

and were also unsure, and tended to disagree with the assertion that “current national

planning policy frameworks weaken the case for heritage work and revenue levels”. The

responses to both of these questions were slightly more positive than they had been in 2016.

The sector continues to agree that a shortage of heritage staff in LPAs was a major constraint

on heritage projects, although this was not felt as strongly as in 2016 (when it was felt more

strongly than it had been in 2015, when in turn it was felt even more strongly than it had

been in 2014). This clearly continues to be a serious issue for the respondents, and has to be

seen in light of the ongoing loss of LPA archaeological advisory posts reported in Total

Employment in UK Archaeology (2.1.5 above).


8 FURTHER COMMENTS

Division of income between waste and energy sectors is becoming blurred - we derive considerable income from biomass energy schemes, which use waste.

If HS2 and the rest of the long planned government infrastructure programme actually starts in 2017 - 18 then commercial practice will have capacity issues to address. If Brexit leads to the inability to recruit from Europe, the potential crisis will be exacerbated. HS2 and Historic England are failing to provide information and leadership to enable commercial practice to plan effectively for the future, and the potential career opportunities through apprenticeships have been compromised by the extreme slowness in setting up a standard, and so are too distant to help with the gathering capacity issue. In the meantime most commercial companies have reasonable order books due to growth in residential housing construction.

It is a good idea to separate our the market sectors a bit (I have added comments to the previous box which are relevant here). As no one comes out of university with vocational experience than the skills are the produce of the training and experience provided. I have never really understood the shortage of skills questions; we lose skills whenever anyone leaves but this is more a random thing depending on the individual who leaves. No one in the sector is very good at training so skills are always short when it comes to recruiting people and I would have to include our organisation here in relation to some of the staff who go elsewhere. As long as people are coming in at the graduate end then any skills shortage is of our own making; rather there is a lack of opportunity and support to provide robust training, especially in management, business and soft skills. There is of course a skills gap when it comes to finds and conservation as these are increasingly hard to procure from people getting close to retirement age. Only the bigger organisations can justify a full range of in house specialists

Our biggest issue is resourcing especially with experienced staff (esp. Project Officers and Managers). Field staff on recent large projects have come from all over Europe, particularly Spain and Italy. Our response has been to employ full time training officers as we try to fast-track employees and embed our recording systems.

Thanks for fixing the glitch

The division into categories of information you require is rather time-consuming and may put organisations off in filling in the survey. Could it be simplified?

there appears to be an error in 35 and 36. I wanted to say that we had both had NVQ posts in the past and would consider for the future, and to say that we would consider apprentices in the future, but an error message was returned. Also on 25 we do not breakdown between commercial and residential/industrial but I have provided figures for what we do have data for

While infrastructure may sustain archaeology over the coming few years, there is a significant risk that the market in other sectors will be damaged by uncertainties around Brexit and the continued imbalances in the UK economy. Planning de-regulation and local authority cuts risk undermining policy and regulatory support. There is a significant danger that while we face unprecedented demand, the foundations of commercial archaeology are being undermined. Next year looks rosy, and possibly the next few, but I am very concerned for the medium term.


APPENDIX – QUESTIONNAIRE














Documents

Prepared for the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists ... · the applied, commercial archaeological workforce had expanded by 9.9% in 2015-16. • In 2016-17, the number of archaeological